| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Silent majority speak and reject LTN schemes and | |
| Posted by: | Andrew Farmer | |
| Date/Time: | 21/08/21 09:07:00 |
| AN OPEN LETTER TO PETER MASON Dear Peter Mason, THE LTN CONSULTATIONS 1. Would you be kind enough to clarify the situation in respect of the Creffield Road South LTN? Some people seem to think it has been “ditched”. On the website that I accessed, it is has been reinstated. The explanation given is that more funds were made available by the Government to allow it to go ahead. Is it still to go ahead or not? 2.The Creffield Road Aouth Consultation When can I expect to see the report on this consultation? It is now closed. Nothing the Government can now do can alter the results. Why the delay? 3. In your pavement address to residents on You Tube, you treated the consultations, not individually, but as a job-lot and discussed them in statistical, for-and-against terms rather than content terms. There was more information on the website. It claims to provide “detailed summaries of the results of the consultations for each LTN”. The Creffield Road South Consultation is not even mentioned. Those that are still only reported in for-and-against terms. These consultations were not put to residents as mere head-counts. Residents will have taken the trouble to respond with detailed objections. A consultation report of any professional integrity and honesty gives an account of the objections raised, not in head-count terms and not in summary form. Summaries have, in my experience in the past, tended to lose the most cogent arguments. An honest report covers all the points made by objectors and RESPONDS to them if the Council wishes to persist in its policy. 5. Is the imposition of LTN’s the Council’s – by which I mean YOUR - policy. It is all very well posing as the helpless victim of government demands and decisions. In my opinion, that is so you can claim that the imposition of LTNs is not within your control and avoid the opprobrium that would fall on your head if you went ahead and imposed them despite having promised to bow to public opinion. You do not have to submit to the Government. And don’t when it suits you. You were happy enough to oppose Government policy when you engineered the Council’s adoption of the fatuous definition of Islamophobia. Where is your report on the Creffield Road South consultation and all the others? The Cabinet is to discuss the matter in September? How can they consider it if deprived of the consultation reports? You need to publish them now in the professional manner I have described. The present head-count offerings are insults to the detailed consideration residents may have given the matter. And why are you procrastinating? If you wish to go with a head-count approach, the head count demands you cancel the majority of the LTNs now, that is if you were honest when you promised to accede to the decision of the public. The public has spoken. The Government is irrelevant. At the heart of this issue is one question: IS THE NEW LEADER OF EALING COUNCIL A MAN OF HIS WORD WHOM WE CAN TRUST? I look forward to a response to my questions at your earliest convenience. Yours sincerely, Andrew Farmer |